From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <1472828103.32433.138.camel@redhat.com> From: Rik van Riel To: James Bottomley , Mark Brown , "Levin, Alexander" Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2016 10:55:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1472827326.2519.14.camel@HansenPartnership.com> References: <57C78BE9.30009@linaro.org> <20160902012531.GB28461@sasha-lappy> <20160902095417.GJ3950@sirena.org.uk> <1472827326.2519.14.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-/PxlcagChDIfC1fRAL0T" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: "ltsi-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [Stable kernel] feature backporting collaboration List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --=-/PxlcagChDIfC1fRAL0T Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 07:42 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 10:54 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > >=C2=A0 > > It's what people are doing for products, they want newer features > > but > > they also don't want to rebase their product kernel onto mainline > > as > > that's an even bigger integration risk.=C2=A0=C2=A0People aren't using = this=C2=A0 > > kernel raw, they're using it as the basis for product > > kernels.=C2=A0=C2=A0What=C2=A0 > > this is doing is getting a bunch of people using the same > > backports=C2=A0 > > which shares effort and hopefully makes it more likely that some > > of=C2=A0 > > the security relevant features will get deployed in products.=C2=A0 >=20 >=20 > And history repeats itself: this is almost the precise rationale the > distros used for all their out of tree patches in their 2.4 > enterprise > kernels.=C2=A0=C2=A0The disaster that ended up with (patch sets bigger th= an the > kernel itself with no way of getting them all upstream) is what led > directly to their upstream first policy. >=20 > The fact that all the distros track upstream more closely also means > it's better tested: the farther away from upstream you move, the more > problems you'll have. >=20 What exactly is the business case for re-learning the same lesson the hard way, anyway? The embedded people can either learn from the mistakes the distro vendors made in the 2.4 era, which was repeated by the Android kernel team later on, or they can choose to repeat that mistake and learn things the hard way. With 6-9 month time to market on products, do you really have time for a 12 month rebase of a gigantic pile of patches? --=20 All Rights Reversed. --=-/PxlcagChDIfC1fRAL0T Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAABCAAGBQJXyZLHAAoJEM553pKExN6DK6AH/3N9I94TAFOmQVa5+HtFzgl8 ldeZU12KOiHDuHhp/sVIH9bUxzlA9sMXB3APb7Ws5RWhE3I+p1xDAV6nMQYTMYty ii4CLS7v0/WQlRjCsELdpxWWeugPQEK1HSszd+atOMnjuhe4cvFy/zNYOTkihTup F7ghv2wqTNPESfeEerxu+VT9l3X8FIXiuXVrQK82X39HuHFEyBb8vcciforetLZq D6jRrg/SIqnKwcWLw0YQRDRFeaXXydIb9um1E4uFXewo0Ilxvj4gzruFJzrkFhx7 fqDOl+nGrdBqHJfwhskiiDgOQIEbvZMU+TNZOUouO7uCzQT5JO13kuGjTJDGZk4= =AmPa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-/PxlcagChDIfC1fRAL0T--